All true. To be fair though, in a high intensity near-peer fight, casualties would be higher and the death-to-wounded-ratio would be lower than 10:1 without air superiority (or supremacy) and an enemy possessing a lot or artillery, SAM's, and armor...
The est. of Russian dead is likely low and may be as high as near 300K. In any case in 'Nam the US lost 58,220 dead (KIA) between 1957-1975 IIRC with the bulk between 1965-1971. There were over 153,000 WIA but you can double that to over 300,000 when wounds not requiring hospitalization are included...
So yeah, the Russians are fucking twisted and ruining their next 50 years in this war. I mean if they told us in Basic Training that we needed to get tampons from our mothers, wives, or girlfriends to treat our battlefield wounds I'd of fucking deserted!...
The est. of Russian dead is likely low and may be as high as near 300K. In any case in 'Nam the US lost 58,220 dead (KIA) between 1957-1975 IIRC with the bulk between 1965-1971. There were over 153,000 WIA but you can double that to over 300,000 when wounds not requiring hospitalization are included...
So yeah, the Russians are fucking twisted and ruining their next 50 years in this war. I mean if they told us in Basic Training that we needed to get tampons from our mothers, wives, or girlfriends to treat our battlefield wounds I'd of fucking deserted!...
Comment